Radiation therapy has become a significant and highly successful process for treating prostate cancer, lung cancer, brain cancer and many other types of localized cancers. Radiation therapy procedures generally involve (a) planning processes to determine the parameters of the radiation (e.g., dose, shape, etc.), (b) patient setup processes to position the target at a desired location relative to the radiation beam, (c) radiation sessions to irradiate the cancer, and (d) verification processes to assess the efficacy of the radiation sessions. Many radiation therapy procedures require several radiation sessions (i.e., radiation fractions) over a period of approximately 5-45 days.
To improve the treatment of localized cancers with radiotherapy, it is generally desirable to increase the radiation dose because higher doses are more effective at destroying most cancers. Increasing the radiation dose, however, also increases the potential for complications to healthy tissues. The efficacy of radiation therapy accordingly depends on both the total dose of radiation delivered to the tumor and the dose of radiation delivered to normal tissue adjacent to the tumor. To protect the normal tissue adjacent to the tumor, the radiation should be prescribed to a tight treatment margin around the target such that only a small volume of healthy tissue is irradiated. For example, the treatment margin for prostate cancer should be selected to avoid irradiating rectal, bladder and bulbar urethral tissues. Similarly, the treatment margin for lung cancer should be selected to avoid irradiating healthy lung tissue or other tissue. Therefore, it is not only desirable to increase the radiation dose delivered to the tumor, but it also desirable to mitigate irradiating healthy tissue.
One difficulty of radiation therapy is that the target often moves within the patient either during or between radiation sessions. For example, the prostate gland moves within the patient during radiation treatment sessions because of respiration motion and/or organ filling/emptying (e.g., full or empty bladder). Tumors in the lungs also move during radiation sessions because of respiration motion and cardiac functions (e.g., heartbeats and vasculature constriction/expansion). To compensate for such movement, the treatment margins are generally larger than desired so that the tumor does not move out of the treatment volume. This is not a desirable solution because the larger treatment margins may irradiate a larger volume of normal tissue.
Another challenge in radiation therapy is accurately aligning the tumor with the radiation beam. Current setup procedures generally align external reference markings on the patient with visual alignment guides for the radiation delivery device. For an example, a tumor is first identified within the patient using an imaging system (e.g., X-ray, computerized tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or ultrasound system). The approximate location of the tumor relative to two or more alignment points on the exterior of the patient is then determined. During setup, the external marks are aligned with a reference frame of the radiation delivery device to position the treatment target within the patient at the beam isocenter of the radiation beam (also referenced herein as the machine isocenter). Conventional setup procedures using external marks are generally inadequate because the target may move relative to the external marks between the patient planning procedure and the treatment session and/or during the treatment session. As such, the target may be offset from the machine isocenter even when the external marks are at their predetermined locations for positioning the target at the machine isocenter. Reducing or eliminating such an offset is desirable because any initial misalignment between the target and the radiation beam will likely cause normal tissue to be irradiated. Moreover, if the target moves during treatment because of respiration, organ filling, or cardiac conditions, any initial misalignment will likely further exacerbate irradiation of normal tissue. Thus, the day-by-day and moment-by-moment changes in target motion have posed significant challenges for increasing the radiation dose applied to patients.
Conventional setup and treatment procedures using external marks also require a direct line-of-sight between the marks and a detector. This requirement renders these systems useless for implanted markers or markers that are otherwise in the patient (i.e., out of the line-of-sight of the detector and/or the light source). Thus, conventional optical tracking systems have many restrictions that limit their utility in medical applications.
In the drawings, identical reference numbers identify similar elements or components. The sizes and relative positions of elements in the drawings are not necessarily drawn to scale. For example, the shapes of various elements and angles are not drawn to scale, and some of these elements are arbitrarily enlarged and positioned to improve drawing legibility. Further, the particular shapes of the elements as drawn, are not intended to convey any information regarding the actual shape of the particular elements, and have been solely selected for ease of recognition in the drawings.